Hybrid View

Grange: "retain Colangelo"

My vote is firmly for MLSE to retain Colangelo; the sooner the better and with a contract that shows their commitment to him.

I think the way he handled himself was as good an example as any. As we all know he can spin and lobby for his cause with the best of them; ‘you’re right, I was wrong’ is not a phrase he’s ever run through Google Translate.

But in his own way he’s been more accountable than he’s typically given credit. He never set out to become the face of the franchise when he came from Phoenix, but he very much has been, which has been a less desirable role in the past 18 months than it was before.

under Colangelo’s watch, with his own contract and the contracts of the rest of the front office staff and the coaching staff hanging in the balance and heading into what will likely be a lockout year, he did what was probably the hardest thing for him to do which was, essentially, not much.

The biggest deal was to move Jarrett Jack’s contract for Jerryd Bayless; gaining cap relief and a young player with some potential. Acquiring James Johnson from Chicago for a low first-round pick was also a low-risk move to gain a player with reasonable upside at little cost and no salary cap implications.

But mostly the year was about letting the season run like water down a dry creek bed as an over-matched team with injuries and personel issues found it’s level and will have the third-best chance to win the first overall pick in the NBA draft lottery. As a man who fusses over decorating touches in the Raptors dressing room and the shade of red on the floor when it was repainted; simply letting things unfold was an act of considerable restraint and sacrifice.

That was accomplished while players like DeMar DeRozen and Amir Johnson continued to develop; while the roster managed to play hard deep into the fourth quarter most nights. The accusations of his man-crush for Andrea Bargnani have generally been off-base. Sure he made the pick; but the kid has been just good enough to get people fired and will continue to be just that for the rest of his career. Colangelo signed him to a relatively cap-friendly deal of $50-million over five years and there will be no hesitation to trade him now that five years into his career there’s a comfort level within the organization that Bargnani is most likely going to be one of those players who looks like an MVP candidate some nights and a decent sixth man some others and shot-hogging stiff everyone once in a while just to confuse things.

Winning is what professional sports is all about; but there’s something to be said for an executive who has experienced the heights of industry – putting together 60-win teams; winning executive of the year recognition twice – accepting (perhaps too late or too grudgingly for my tastes) the need to take multiple steps back in order to go forward again.

We’d all have more confidence in MLSE if they’d recognized they wanted to fire Colangelo and had an alternative plan in place and made the move in December. That would suggest sports intellects in charge that could plot a clear path and execute.

But that never happened and instead there was the single person most closely identified with a $399-million asset and one of the most influential and respected figures in the sport giving a season-ending press conference qualifying nearly every answer with some version of “If I’m here” and listing his accomplishments like an MBA grad at a job interview: “In terms of passion for the business and dedication to the organization …I would hope people think I am the right guy.”

The temptation to light a fire to the whole thing, I’m sure, was real. To just say it’s been five years of climbing up hill here; I did some pretty good things; I took some risks and not all of them worked out, but guess what? This is pro sports; not the investment industry. There are no management fees built-in to assure everyone a profit regardless of what happens to market.

Those so eager to see Colangelo move on might want to give a some hard thought to what the Plan B might be.

I am extremely certain that as is, if Colangelo is allowed to walk, a lesser GM will take his place at a critical moment of a Raptors rebuild. It's just plain stupid not to keep him when they have no backup plan. It's not fair to us the fans even if we don't all realize the negative consequences of what may unfold thanks to some accountant on the board representing a investment group who could care less about how the product looks or how the fans feel about it.

I am extremely certain that as is, if Colangelo is allowed to walk, a lesser GM will take his place at a critical moment of a Raptors rebuild. It's just plain stupid not to keep him when they have no backup plan. It's not fair to us the fans even if we don't all realize the negative consequences of what may unfold thanks to some accountant on the board representing a investment group who could care less about how the product looks or how the fans feel about it.

And when you consider the team has never been more profitable under his watch it is clear there is personal issues at play - in my very big assumption opinion.

And when you consider the team has never been more profitable under his watch it is clear there is personal issues at play - in my very big assumption opinion.

And when you also consider he mentioned yesterday season ticket purchases and renewals were higher than the last couple of years (with a 22 win team) it gives an indication the fanbase likes what they see moving forward*.

Good article, it articulates the pros/cons of the looming decision whether to keep BC quite well.

I'd like to see him stick around for at least another 2 seasons, since there's a good chance the Raps will be a lottery team again next year. I want to see where BC can take this team after 3 true rebuilding seasons. We just finished #1 and when I compare where the team is this offseason compared to last offseason, without even factoring in the draft and any trades/signings, I am quite happy overall.

Good article, it articulates the pros/cons of the looming decision whether to keep BC quite well.

I'd like to see him stick around for at least another 2 seasons, since there's a good chance the Raps will be a lottery team again next year. I want to see where BC can take this team after 3 true rebuilding seasons. We just finished #1 and when I compare where the team is this offseason compared to last offseason, without even factoring in the draft and any trades/signings, I am quite happy overall.

You thought that was year 1 of the rebuild? i ithnk the rebuild starts now with this top 3 draft pick. the rebuild kinda started this year but no really. 2011-2012 is the official first year of the rebuild.

You thought that was year 1 of the rebuild? i ithnk the rebuild starts now with this top 3 draft pick. the rebuild kinda started this year but no really. 2011-2012 is the official first year of the rebuild.

Absolutely we just finished year 1 of the rebuild.

Prior to this season the franchise player was traded away, a second straight lottery pick was drafted, salary was dumped, young assets with potential were stockpiled to the point that the team has one of the youngest rosters in the league and the 22-win season was judged to be successful because of the development of primarily DeRozan and Davis... what more would a team have to do in a single season to constitute a rebuild, if that wasn't enough???

I agree that BC has to stay. His patience with this protracted process at MLSE alone is reason for him to rise in the estimation of Raps fans, but he has set the table for steady progress in the years ahead. I don't know of anyone else out there who could fill his shoes.

I am for keeping him no surprises here. Definitely do not want to change ships in the middle of a rebuild, and that all important (as Matt pointed out) "the team has never been more profitable". This allows more moves, more freedom, more excitement.

I am for keeping him no surprises here. Definitely do not want to change ships in the middle of a rebuild, and that all important (as Matt pointed out) "the team has never been more profitable". This allows more moves, more freedom, more excitement.

i tihnk the raptors are in the best possition they have every been in. the USA has siffering with a poor economy and Canada is the exact opposite. we are doing better then ever before and our dollar was at $1.04 can to $1.00 US.

I am extremely certain that as is, if Colangelo is allowed to walk, a lesser GM will take his place at a critical moment of a Raptors rebuild. It's just plain stupid not to keep him when they have no backup plan. It's not fair to us the fans even if we don't all realize the negative consequences of what may unfold thanks to some accountant on the board representing a investment group who could care less about how the product looks or how the fans feel about it.

Let me play Devil's Advocate to the "BC must stay meme".

1. BC makes the pick in the draft. BC leaves. NBA lockout. MLSE searches for new GM. MLSE (just cause it's MLSE) picks worst GM alive in the history of mankind. Team is awful in 2011-12 (assuming there is even a season). Team is sold. New owner does 'x'. Team still sucks in 2012-13. New owner replaces management team.

2. BC makes the pick in the draft. BC is re-signed. NBA lockout. Team is awful in 2011-12 (assuming season). Team is sold. New owner does 'x'. Team is awful to low-end playoff team in 2012-13. New owner makes decision on BC.

Or does everyone believe that BC, and only BC, can turn this roster into a championship contender inside of 6 months?

I see everyone writing that this is a critical time for the Raptors in this rebuild while at the same time writing that: this draft is awful, there is uncertainty about free agents given the lockout, there is going to be a lockout, and this team needs a long rebuild of three to five years. Given all of that, is signing Colangelo to a 5-year deal really that critical? The idea posited in the above post is that BC is irreplacable is nonsense. As I've noted time and time again, we won't know who is available until they start looking (see: Colangelo, Brian; Raptors, 2006). The idea the Raptors couldn't do better than Colangelo is based on the Babcock hire in 2005 but blithely ignores the Colangelo hire in 2006, which these same people thought was a great hire. It also requires mental gymnastics of Olympian quality to convince yourself that Colangelo has done a good job in Toronto.

If this latter position is, "Colangelo has done a bad job but we will never find anyone better cause it's the Raptors", then perhaps, if the standards are so low, the team should simply fold up its tent and disband.

I am positive Colangelo will be back. If I have one knock on him its that he shouldn't of tried to rebuild around Bosh. That being said, I don't know if he necessarily wanted to build around Bosh, or to simply please the fans. Either way, he has a nose for drafting diamonds. I am excited to see what he can do in this next phase of the Raptors rebuilding process.

I see everyone writing that this is a critical time for the Raptors in this rebuild while at the same time writing that: this draft is awful, there is uncertainty about free agents given the lockout, there is going to be a lockout, and this team needs a long rebuild of three to five years. Given all of that, is signing Colangelo to a 5-year deal really that critical?

More critical than ever to have a stable management in this time of uncertainty. I wouldn't want anyone in the league other than Fruitman analysing the new CBA in context of the Raptors salary situation, and I wouldn't want anyone else than BC mucking around with the draft. Say what you will about Colangelo's past trade history; his past draft history is up there with the best.

On the trade front, there have been stinkers when going for broke (Hedo, Kapono, O'Neal) and there have been gems with the smaller moves when amassing assets and divesting shite (Hump/Hoffa, Hedo/LB, Johnson/Miami's 1st, Delfino/Amir, etc.). At the time of the Hedo deal, many thought it had an above-average chance of working out well based on Hedo's performance leading Orlando to the finals. Nobody could have predicted his attitude in Toronto. O'Neal was a skeptic's dream when it happened, but it did start well, and was a low-risk, high-reward move in any case.

Really, the negative aspects of BC's tenure all go back to 2 keys:

1. Trying to build around a guy (Bosh) who isn't designed to be a championship team's alpha dog and who maybe figured that out earlier himself than management did, and;

2. Placing too much faith in the potential of Bargnani. The cliche that big men take longer to develop is overused, sure, but it's also accurate. So waiting 5 years in vain for AB can now be seen as hindsight, but trading him after, say, 3 years, when earning a rookie contract, would have risked having him blossom elsewhere for little in return. Now, after seeing him in the role that they hoped would spur his development (#1 scoring option, team "leader") they know, like we do, that he's not a great fit for this team.

At this point, all signs point to BC and Triano both realzing (or admitting) the failures and deficiencies of this team. What they both said in their pressers is basically the same opinion voiced by hardcore fans, albeit in a more reasonable tone. So now it's on them to prove it through action.

The roster does have potential. There is a lot of financial flexibility. They seem to realize what needs to be fixed, changed, etc. I really see no valid reason to change at this point.

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

1. BC makes the pick in the draft. BC leaves. NBA lockout. MLSE searches for new GM. MLSE (just cause it's MLSE) picks worst GM alive in the history of mankind. Team is awful in 2011-12 (assuming there is even a season). Team is sold. New owner does 'x'. Team still sucks in 2012-13. New owner replaces management team.

2. BC makes the pick in the draft. BC is re-signed. NBA lockout. Team is awful in 2011-12 (assuming season). Team is sold. New owner does 'x'. Team is awful to low-end playoff team in 2012-13. New owner makes decision on BC.

Or does everyone believe that BC, and only BC, can turn this roster into a championship contender inside of 6 months?

I see everyone writing that this is a critical time for the Raptors in this rebuild while at the same time writing that: this draft is awful, there is uncertainty about free agents given the lockout, there is going to be a lockout, and this team needs a long rebuild of three to five years. Given all of that, is signing Colangelo to a 5-year deal really that critical? The idea posited in the above post is that BC is irreplacable is nonsense. As I've noted time and time again, we won't know who is available until they start looking (see: Colangelo, Brian; Raptors, 2006). The idea the Raptors couldn't do better than Colangelo is based on the Babcock hire in 2005 but blithely ignores the Colangelo hire in 2006, which these same people thought was a great hire. It also requires mental gymnastics of Olympian quality to convince yourself that Colangelo has done a good job in Toronto.

If this latter position is, "Colangelo has done a bad job but we will never find anyone better cause it's the Raptors", then perhaps, if the standards are so low, the team should simply fold up its tent and disband.

But again, there is the what have you done for me lately mentality. He won an Atlantic title, 2 playoff appearances, made ballsy moves to build around Bosh that didn't pan out, and, in less than one season of a rebuild, has the 5th lowest payroll committed for next year, acquired a few young players with upside (Bayless and James Johnson in particluar) and has made two great draft picks at 9 and 13 in the last 2 seasons. The worst of the rebuild is over in my opinion - bad contracts gone (Calderon and Bargnani arguable), high draft pick secured, young players acquired and developing, and financial flexibility means the ball is rolling.

The team will most likely not compete for the playoffs again next season but for the long term development of the franchise, that is probably in its best interest especially considering the talent coming out next year.

I don't think anyone has said BC is irreplaceable - if I am wrong, link the post. What people, myself included, are saying is:

1) he is a very accomplished and good GM,
2) given no search has begun, what viable candidate will be out there to not only replace him but to be better given his experience,
3) who better to rebuild a franchise than a GM with a proven track record in the draft,
4) who better to rebuild a franchise than a Gm with a proven track record of diamonds in the rough,
5) who better to rebuild a franchise than a GM who is not afraid to pull the trigger on blockbuster deals.

For a history of the franchise before Colangelo arrived, memory refresher:

And remember the stellar draft picks of the 2000's before BC Michael Bradley, Araujo, Kareem Rush (traded), Charlie V, and Joey Graham of the 2000's. The only solid pick was Bosh in 2003.

Now recall the record of BC - not stellar this year but considering minus the VC playoff years the most games the Raps EVER won was 33 and all of a sudden it seems apparent how far the franchise has come:

I won't change anyone's views on Colangelo, which were galvanized long ago and I understand the pro-BC narrative (I won't rehash old arguments cause we will never agree) but the fact remains that for all of BC's prowess the last 4 seasons have been a major disappointment and this team isn't anywhere close to where it was supposed to be 5 years ago when BC came to Toronto.

One other thing, give him a mulligan if you wish and blame whomever you want for the failures of the organization the last 4 years but don't serve me Alpo and tell me it's caviar. If the standard we are holding Raptors management to is 1996-2005, which included expansion years and some of the worst management teams and ownership debacles in NBA history, then the bar is so low that it may as well just be buried.

But again, there is the what have you done for me lately mentality. He won an Atlantic title, 2 playoff appearances, made ballsy moves to build around Bosh that didn't pan out, and, in less than one season of a rebuild, has the 5th lowest payroll committed for next year, acquired a few young players with upside (Bayless and James Johnson in particluar) and has made two great draft picks at 9 and 13 in the last 2 seasons. The worst of the rebuild is over in my opinion - bad contracts gone (Calderon and Bargnani arguable), high draft pick secured, young players acquired and developing, and financial flexibility means the ball is rolling.

The team will most likely not compete for the playoffs again next season but for the long term development of the franchise, that is probably in its best interest especially considering the talent coming out next year.

I don't think anyone has said BC is irreplaceable - if I am wrong, link the post. What people, myself included, are saying is:

1) he is a very accomplished and good GM,
2) given no search has begun, what viable candidate will be out there to not only replace him but to be better given his experience,
3) who better to rebuild a franchise than a GM with a proven track record in the draft,
4) who better to rebuild a franchise than a Gm with a proven track record of diamonds in the rough,
5) who better to rebuild a franchise than a GM who is not afraid to pull the trigger on blockbuster deals.

For a history of the franchise before Colangelo arrived, memory refresher:

And remember the stellar draft picks of the 2000's before BC Michael Bradley, Araujo, Kareem Rush (traded), Charlie V, and Joey Graham of the 2000's. The only solid pick was Bosh in 2003.

Now recall the record of BC - not stellar this year but considering minus the VC playoff years the most games the Raps EVER won was 33 and all of a sudden it seems apparent how far the franchise has come:

You think Colangelo had more to do with winning that division title and early successes more than Bosh and Mitchell did?

I liked some of his acquisitions for that squad (TJ, Parker, Garbo) but they have all fallen off the NBA map (other than Parker playing for a bottom feeder) but Bosh's performance (2nd All NBA team) and Mitchell finding chemistry amongst 8-9 new acquisitions were larger factors to winning than Colangelo was.

He didn't make 'ballsy' moves to build around Bosh otherwise he would have not drafted Bargnani who is a 'natural 4' as BC has indicated. Gettign O'Neal might be considered corageous but only becasue of his previous injury status. When did he ever cquire a swing who could make some plays down the stretch. Builing with Bosh and around him are 2 different things.

If BC is kept on I expect more of the same. I'm hoping a change is in the works.

You think Colangelo had more to do with winning that division title and early successes more than Bosh and Mitchell did?

I liked some of his acquisitions for that squad (TJ, Parker, Garbo) but they have all fallen off the NBA map (other than Parker playing for a bottom feeder) but Bosh's performance (2nd All NBA team) and Mitchell finding chemistry amongst 8-9 new acquisitions were larger factors to winning than Colangelo was.

He didn't make 'ballsy' moves to build around Bosh otherwise he would have not drafted Bargnani who is a 'natural 4' as BC has indicated. Gettign O'Neal might be considered corageous but only becasue of his previous injury status. When did he ever cquire a swing who could make some plays down the stretch. Builing with Bosh and around him are 2 different things.

If BC is kept on I expect more of the same. I'm hoping a change is in the works.

You don't have to drink BC koolaid, but you have to be fair too. Every major move BC did was greeted with major approval from the media, fans and his star player (Bosh)... hindsight is 20/20, but BC made the big splash and wasn't afraid to make follow-up moves when they didn't pan out the way everybody expected them to.

1) Bosh wanted a dynamic PG who could penetrate and create opportunities for him, since that was the way the league was going back then, so BC traded PF depth (Charlie V.) for a young PG (Ford)

2) Bosh wanted to shift to PF because he was sick of getting hammered while playing C and wanted to be able to focus on offense instead of defense (hmmm who does that sound like now), so BC traded PG depth (Ford) for a proven C (O'Neal)

3) Bosh & O'Neal didn't pan out, Bargnani was looking like a decent talent (and looked to be developing some good chemistry with Bosh) and the overwhelming consensus was that the team was lacking a stud wing, so BC traded C depth (O'Neal) for a proven SF (Marion)

4) Marion seemed destined to leave the team for nothing and the team drafted a highly touted wing (DeRozan), so BC replaced one proven wing (Marion) with another proven wing who had a glowing reputation as both a distributor and 3-pt shooter (Turkoglu), to help spread the floor and give Bosh more room to operate

These moves were all home-run style moves that didn't pan out, but BC deserves credit for making them AND for correcting them when they didn't work out. He tried his best to build a solid team around a player perceived to be a franchise player in Bosh... the biggest problem was that Bosh never was a true franchise player... he was a good player on a terrible team. For 7 years, nobody faulted BC for building around Bosh, so don't start knocking him using hindsight!

You don't have to drink BC koolaid, but you have to be fair too. Every major move BC did was greeted with major approval from the media, fans and his star player (Bosh)... hindsight is 20/20, but BC made the big splash and wasn't afraid to make follow-up moves when they didn't pan out the way everybody expected them to.

1) Bosh wanted a dynamic PG who could penetrate and create opportunities for him, since that was the way the league was going back then, so BC traded PF depth (Charlie V.) for a young PG (Ford)

2) Bosh wanted to shift to PF because he was sick of getting hammered while playing C and wanted to be able to focus on offense instead of defense (hmmm who does that sound like now), so BC traded PG depth (Ford) for a proven C (O'Neal)

3) Bosh & O'Neal didn't pan out, Bargnani was looking like a decent talent (and looked to be developing some good chemistry with Bosh) and the overwhelming consensus was that the team was lacking a stud wing, so BC traded C depth (O'Neal) for a proven SF (Marion)

4) Marion seemed destined to leave the team for nothing and the team drafted a highly touted wing (DeRozan), so BC replaced one proven wing (Marion) with another proven wing who had a glowing reputation as both a distributor and 3-pt shooter (Turkoglu), to help spread the floor and give Bosh more room to operate

These moves were all home-run style moves that didn't pan out, but BC deserves credit for making them AND for correcting them when they didn't work out. He tried his best to build a solid team around a player perceived to be a franchise player in Bosh... the biggest problem was that Bosh never was a true franchise player... he was a good player on a terrible team. For 7 years, nobody faulted BC for building around Bosh, so don't start knocking him using hindsight!

Before assuming that all moves were made with "what Bosh wanted" I will revisit this as you did.

1) This was the first year of BC's tenure and Bosh wasn't asking him for anything. This was a BC move and a good one for the time being. Bosh started asking for a swing that can take the presssure off the last 2 years in a Raps uniform. He took DeRozan instead of Jennings who would have fit that 'request' more. I like Demar's upside but if you are going to point these things out please do it chronologically and as it happened.

2) Bosh wanted to play the 4 because he is not a center. I do agree that they tried acquiring JO to help with this issue but before his acquisition and not shortly after the JO trade to Miami he was back to guarding the tougher match-up (center or 4) because of who he was teamed up with in the front court (#7).

3) Marion is not a stud wing and doesn't create any shots for himself.

4) DeRozan was unproven and once again not polished nor the type of swing that could make an immediate impact. Turks was playing with 4 other all-stars in Orlando and BC was said to be in love with his game. If you think acquiring Turks ina contract year was solely for appeasing Bosh your not looking at the situation in it's totality. BC didn't have to spend the money but he wanted to make a splash for a player that DID NOT fit his roster.

He deserves credit for making poor moves in an attempt to build around Bosh? He wasn't building around Bosh only with him no matter what BC would try to make everyone believe.

And if he tried to build around a player who you clearly say is not a franchise player what does that say about Colangelo? Why waste time (5 years) and resources doing this when your whole outlook was flawed to begin with???

You think Colangelo had more to do with winning that division title and early successes more than Bosh and Mitchell did?

When there were only 6 returning players from a 27 win team with the same coach only to win 47 games a season later, then yes, I think BC had more to do with it than Mitchell and Bosh.

I liked some of his acquisitions for that squad (TJ, Parker, Garbo) but they have all fallen off the NBA map (other than Parker playing for a bottom feeder) but Bosh's performance (2nd All NBA team) and Mitchell finding chemistry amongst 8-9 new acquisitions were larger factors to winning than Colangelo was.

Who acquired the players? This is a chicken and egg discussion and obviously opinions differ. I'll agree to disagree.

He didn't make 'ballsy' moves to build around Bosh otherwise he would have not drafted Bargnani who is a 'natural 4' as BC has indicated. Gettign O'Neal might be considered corageous but only becasue of his previous injury status. When did he ever cquire a swing who could make some plays down the stretch. Builing with Bosh and around him are 2 different things.

Swinging for the fences on O'Neal and Turkoglu were ballsy. The man is not afraid to stick his neck out and go for broke. What I like about the current situation is a proper team can be built versus patched together.

If BC is kept on I expect more of the same. I'm hoping a change is in the works.

I disagree. The change in style of playes that have been brought in (young, athletic, defensive and/or rebounding minded) is an obvious change in direction. Bargnani and Calderon are the only players left from the BC-stereotype - and I fully expect one or both to be gone before next year.